So Called Marks Regnerus “Study” on Gay Parenting is Bull
This study from anti gay, anti gay marriage the space cadets Regnerus and Marks was taken so seriously by all those people that have been praying for some evidence that homosexuals are bad parents, but the bubble is burst. How can gays being bad people be good parents. Not possible. When the anti gay religious Republicans got hold on these documents, which was full of obvious holes from the beginning it was passed as the second set of gospels. There are statements made by Marks contradicting sworn statements that were made on the Prop 8 case. Before anybody had a chance to go over these documents and study the source, the republican bloggers and some media were singing praises that what they had been praying for was here. Gay parents makes for bad parenting.
It’s incredible that for people that are supposed to be christian, you get the most propaganda, based on lies.
I know that their bible says those lying wont inherit the kingdom of god. But since that does not serve their bias, that is ignore. Because you can pick and choose what to follow and what not to do.
Now I’m just asking, what do these people teach their kids? To lie and to give ‘false testimony’ on people they don’t like?
ok…..What was wrong with this so called study?
1. The sample that they took to ask the questions in which their study is based, fatally flawed with a disingenuous group of respondent. If I want to know what people think about christianity and if the people I pick are christians, what answers Am I going to get? They are going to be one sided in favor of it.
You need to have a diverse group of people and the questions cannot be leading questions. In this aspect the so called study fails. How did they do this?
By only showing that children from more impoverished homes and single parent homes did less well than those from affluent and intact home settings - It was political…why? Because it was deliberately coordinated for release in the run up to the 2012 elections where same sex marriage will be on the ballot in multiple states.
2. The second reason is the background of the people doing the study. On this part Im going to give you a posting from Think Progress which has been going over the study and these two men:
adamfoxie*
Scott Rose at The New Civil Rights Movement is building a compelling case that the publication of these two papers was coordinated with anti-gay groups who would capitalize on its political implications. Here are some of the clues Rose has discovered: Regnerus and Marks published their pieces together, but Marks cited Regnerus’ paper, so he clearly had foreknowledge of its conclusions. This suggests it is likely they intentionally published simultaneously as a “one-two election year punch.”
Marks was originally called to testify in favor of Proposition 8, but admitted in deposition that he only had read parts of the studies from which he drew conclusions and had considered no research on gay and lesbian parents. His present research, published just two years later, attempts to make the same claims.Authors of Disreputable study
- Marks also made his paper available for the House Republican legal team defending the Defense of Marriage Act long before it was published in a peer-reviewed journal.
- There are multiple obvious ties between NOM co-founder Robert George, the Witherspoon Institute (which funded Regnerus’ research), Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion (which isdefending the research), National Review (where NOM’s Maggie Gallagher frequently writes and where she has promoted the paper), and Mark Regnerus himself, suggesting particularly convenient collusion for spinning the political implications of the paper’s publication.
Comments